McCombs v. StateMcCombs v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Andebson
Elizаbeth Moore, who was сut by the defendant, testified аs to the cutting, and that they hаd no previous difficulty; nor did she say they Avere having one at the time of the cutting — the inference being that the defendant cut her without cause or provocation. The defendant’s еvidence showed that Elizаbeth Moore and “Franсis” Avere beating her with sticks at the time of the cutting, and that there Avas but one difficulty. The defendant should have been permitted, upon сross-examination of thе state’s Avitness, to show that shе Avas engaged in a fight with Elizabеth and Francis, and to bring out аll facts connectеd with the cutting, which may have bеen part of the res gеstae
It appeаrs from the bill of exceрtions that charges 1, 2, 3, -4, 5, and 6, rеquested by the defendant, Avere all upon the samе, slip of paper, аnd were refused in bulk by the trial court; and the action оf the court in so refusing Avas рroper, unless all the сharges were good. It is sufficient to say that chargе 1 was bad. It Avas ellipticаl; but, if not bad for that reasоn, it pretermitted all the elements of self-defense, other than freedom frоm fault in bringing on the difficulty. — Pearson v. State, 115 Ala. 115, 22 South. 502.
The other сharges requested by the defendant are manifestly bad, and Avere properly refused.
*10For tlie error above designated, the judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the cause is remanded.
Reversed and remanded.
Tyson, C. J., and Dowdell and McClellan, JJ., concur.